Posted on 02/03/2005 6:00:49 PM PST by John Lenin
I'm sorry. I like Peggy Noonan but on this issue I think she's nuts.
Basically she's complaining that he spoke his mind. I think it was necessary to put everyone on notice that he really means it, that we are not just playing a game until the election is over.
Not worshipped by me. I think she's a legend in her own mind.
Listening to her is painful.
Peggy! You must conform, and must agree 100% with the Bush-bots,or you will be sent to the Russian front!
Peggy is right. The neo-cons are adapting Woodrow Wilson strategy of going to war to spread democracy. Wilson's post WWI world was a complete failure, largely due to the failure of democracies. Why can't Bush put a conservative dictator like Franco into Iraq? There isn't a single Muslim state that has a working democracy for any significant period of time because democracy also happens to be incompatible with Islam.
I think Peggy Noonan is in a group of Reagan worshippers who are very afraid that GWB will eclipse their idol.
I loved Reagan myself, but it is possible that GWB will be an even greater President. I would rather applaud that possibility than do everything to keep him from outshining RWR.
But I don't think Peggy Noonan does. The Reagan Admin., after all, was the highlight of her career, and why she still has clout.
>>>So herewith some questions and answers:
.....
Am I heartened by White House clarifications that the speech did not intend to announce the unveiling of a new policy?
......<<<<
haha.... herewith??? who's she trying to kid?
and "clarification"? hmmm... i guess some people needed "clarification" and some didn't. i sure didn't.
and what is with all the name dropping in this thing? does she always do that?
and before i get accused of being a traitor to the Peggy - this is the second article of hers i have read that i remember. looks like it will be the last also.
Let me say I would live under Franco than under the Marxist republic that preceded him in Spain.
Is Simon Boliver your hero? Do you think he was good for Latin America?
Are you can tell me exactly how much violence was necessary for a revolution from the old monarchies? I can answer it easily - none at all.
Peggy Noonan has so JUMPED THE SHARK.
>>Yes. But words have meaning. To declare that it is now the policy of the United States to eradicate tyranny in the world, that we are embarking on the greatest crusade in the history of freedom, and that the survival of American liberty is dependent on the liberty of every other nation--seemed to me, and seems to me, rhetorical and emotional overreach of the most embarrassing sort. <<
woops i spoke too soon. even with supposed "clarification" she still doesn't get it. how.... pathetic.
she kinda like to overhype and exagerate a tad eh? does she always do that? CRUSADE even... hehe
I just feel like Peggy didn't get it. And she doesn't get it that we DO get it. As if it's impossible for us to get it if she doesn't get it.
I get the feeling that what she calls overreaching and embarrassing to her in this speech is the very stuff that embarrasses all the elites about us red state 'Mericans.
This bears repeating. Well said.
you are joking right? our country was founded on the blood of many brave patriots who fought a revolution against a tyrant king.
>>Why don't I see the speech as so many others do, as a thematic and romantic statement of what we all hope for, world freedom? Don't we all want that?
Yes. But words have meaning. To declare that it is now the policy of the United States to eradicate tyranny in the world, that we are embarking on the greatest crusade in the history of freedom, and that the survival of American liberty is dependent on the liberty of every other nation--seemed to me, and seems to me, rhetorical and emotional overreach of the most embarrassing sort. <<
Yo, Peggie. You maybe can write, but you sure having problem reading/listening. As far as this illiterate can figure, Bush never said ERADICATE or EVERY OTHER nation. We GOT the idea he is trying to communicate and we know what he means, and we are right behind him!!! You must have a case of Ratherism, seeing and putting words in W's mouth.
You were probably one who told Reagan not to put "Tear this wall down commie Gorbachev". If you lived under commie oppression, you would not call it "rhetorical and emotional overreach". You have no idea how oppressed people crave the freedom, chance to live without fear, how they look to America (listened to Radio Free Europe) with hope that one day the -ism will fall.
Your pea brain is no match for W's poker skills and determination to follow on his words. It looks pathetic that you are trying to correct and criticize the one whodunit!
If Bush gets fraction of what he said done, it will be mo' hugh than what all the RATs together have done so far. I love how Bush is playing you feeble minds.
Bush is now showing you that he can make brilliant speech, he got my tear!!!
I searched, the article didn't come up. Probably because we both added our own comments to the title.
No biggie. I have made the same mistake. Just letting you know about Peggy and Ann. As you may have noticed, they have something aproaching a religious following here.
"consists mainly of feelings and fluff"
Agreed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.